Quote:Sparring, as I do it includes punching/hand techniques of all types, kicks, knees, clinching, ground fighting, ground n pound with open hand strikes, no elbows, etc. Full power to the body, slight power to the head/face with open hands usually. No gear most of the time. Soemtimes it'll jsut be kicks and punches or grappling only. Thats sparring as I do it. Just to be clear I'm with you on the kata thing for the most part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tL9rGeKZGU This is a video Dan has posted before. A lot of it actually isnt Dan. Would you be willing to tell me, good and bad, what you think by pm? Or if it's all bad say nothing, only good stuff you see, what've makes you feel like you're being nice. I'm actually genuinely curious what people think.

you are genuinely curious, yet you limit the reviews to only the good stuff. hmmm...ok. The good thing about the video was that it contrasts the sharp difference to boxing's resistive training method.

I only said that because Jkogas is afraid of not being nice.Anyway, there was a lot of resistance in that video.

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Quote:The boxer vs. Shotokan guy obviously wasnt a full force, knockdown kind of thing, it was just easy going sparring, the point was to show what Karate would look like applied against a boxer and that it can be used for such. Say the boxer went a bit faster and harder. So what, the Karate guy could do the same. The technical side is what I'm looking at.

Do you see how this contradict's itself? How is anything being shown at all. This is what this video is showing

1. A beginning level boxer, with no footwork to speak of. 2. A black belt Karateka3. Karate techniques being performed against prearranged attacks, done at a much slower motion than actual 'fighting speed', and that are entirely compliant.

How does this show, or prove anything? Do you honestly not see how this is exactly the hypothetical, co-operative practice that I've stated is the core of much of tradional karate, and the very kind of training that can lead to an art being ineffective? The way those 'boxing' (and I use that term loosely) attack are performed, I could insert any hairbrained technique in there. How about a back flip, into flying jump kick, land that, then tornado kick the boxer from behind? In other words, I could use any technique in the situation presented in the video. IT PROVES NOTHING. It doesn't even 'show' anything, there is absolutely no value to this video at all. It is not scientific, nor suggestive on any level of what a fight between a karateka and a boxer would look like. Why?

Well, firstly, in order to produce such a thing, you need a boxer. I didn't see a boxer in this video, just someone imitating a boxer. If I took a boxer, put a gi and a blackbelt on him, showed him a video of karate techniques and asked him to perform them against, say, Lennox Lewis, would I invalidate karate by such a process. No. Of course not. The same goes for this thing. The next thing I would have to do, if showing what a karateka would look like in a fight against a boxer, is actually have them fight.

Neither of these are present in this video. There is no boxer, there is no fight. There is only choreography and hypothesis.

I also strongly object to you saying this was "just easy going sparring". This was NOT sparring! This was a choreographed movement and has about as much to do with sparring as that knife fight in West Side Story has to do with sparring. I'm not being dramatic here, I mean this seriously.

Quote:Again, he could probably go harder and faster and meaner, but so could the Karate guy. Same difference.

No, it isn't the same difference at all. A boxer (not the one in the video, again, that isn't a boxer) has proven his techniques in resistent combat for many centuries. The karateka (the kind in this video, not all of them!) has not yet to do so once.

Quote: How come when you guys post stuff to back up your opinions it's just that, but when we do it it's propaganda, or we're being unfair somehow? Like we're trying to manipulate people.

I'm not saying YOU are manipulating people. I'm saying whoever made this video was engaging in the creation of propaganda. Here's how Webster's defines propaganda:

Quote:2: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person3: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause ; also : a public action having such an effect

This video, in relation to what I said above, has all the hallmarks of propaganda.

Quote: I'm simply rying to show that Karate techniques can be applied against boxing techniques and can be applied in fighting in general

Ok, then do that. So, far none of those videos do so at all. Oh, and you will eventually be able to find videos of 'karateka' beating boxers. But those karateka will be using boxing hands and boxing style footwork, and their training methodology will most likely be more akin to the Western/sport approach, than the Eastern.

Quote:Whether you personally like the rules or not, it's still sparring. Whether they trained that way origionally or not, thats not the point, the point is whether the techniques are applicable.

I'm not talking about any old sparring, especially not the point sparring *stuff* in that first video. If I was to chose between what is more effective, point sparring or co-operative driling, I'd choose the latter. I'm not talking about anything that call's itself 'sparring', I've been talking about knockdown, sparring, which better approximates real combat. Point sparring, as it applies to fighting, is good for learning how to pull a punch, and that's about it (imo).

Quote:Honest question-is your issue with the techniques of traditional Karate, or the training methods?

My problem is with any tradional karate techniques that are drilled using tradional training methods.

Quote:And about the defense force karate-Who're you to say they never use Kata in training or pre-arranged sparring? You always get on me for hypotheticals, well your opinion that they dont do kata is just an opinion, a hypothetical. You have no evidence

I actually do know this. At least I know that kata did not play a major role in the training of those people in those video. They drilled aplications with resistence and sparred. There was quite a large thread on e-budo about that video in question. I'm not going to go searching the archives, so you'll have to take my word for it. If you choose to disbelieve me, then I'll go and search out the evidence to prove it.

But that doesn't matter anyway. This is what I actually said:

Quote:I doubt there is much kata training going on with these guys. This video does not speak to the training methodologies of tradional karate in the slightest.

Let's just go off that video and what it shows. Tell me, would you say the type of training in that video is the exception or the rule for tradional karate and the way you've seen it taught. Be honest now. It isn't. There is obviosly a very diffirent training methodology happening even in those videos and therefore they do little to make a case for trad. karate as whole.

--Chris

Edited by Ames (11/13/0801:41 AM)

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

Yes I realize most of that video you hate was choreagraphed, except for the first short part although nontheless even the choreagraphed parts somewhat show what boxing vs. Karate would look like. And if you think the Karate guy sucked so much and probably had crappy training methods dont equat this with putting somebody who doesnt do Karate putting on a gi and imitating agaisnt a boxing champion. The Karate guy must suck so it's more like an amateur boxer vs. another amateur boxer putting on a gi and imitating Karate. But hey it's a moot point, the video sucks right? I concede about the Defence Force Karate video, I'll take yoru word for that one.One example I can think of, is Mas Oyama (an old traditional Karate master) and some of his students beating a few Thai boxing champions in the 70's or 80's which is fairly well known. Granting it actually happend what would you say about that?

I'm not concerned so much with the training methods as the specific fighting techniques. I realise Kata isnt all that useful. Though starting out some pre-arranged sparring can be helpful I think.As far as what's the rule, well you're right Karate usally sucks but I have seen some good places. For exmaple my old Kenpo school was a traditional system but they trained hard and with resistence. Even in the "step-sparring" and self defense training it was either your technique worked or you got clocked. Sparring was full contact, though without grappling. What would you say about Victor Smith's view of Karate as being highly functional?

Come to think of it the sparring part of that first vid was too brief.

Edited by Stormdragon (11/13/0801:55 AM)

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Okay...I'm just going to move on from the video. All I'm going to say is this:

Quote:even the choreagraphed parts somewhat show what boxing vs. Karate would look like.

No.

Quote:And if you think the Karate guy sucked so much and probably had crappy training methods dont equat this with putting somebody who doesnt do Karate putting on a gi and imitating agaisnt a boxing champion.

No.

I'm not trying to be glib here, but I already made a pretty good case for why that video does nothing towards your argument.

Anyway...

Quote:One example I can think of, is Mas Oyama (an old traditional Karate master) and some of his students beating a few Thai boxing champions in the 70's or 80's which is fairly well known. Granting it actually happend what would you say about that?

I would say that Oyama's fighters intially lost and that in order to beat the Thai's they had to start training like the Thai's. The Thai's took their training approach from Western Boxing. I would say this is a good example of what I'm talking about: that a functional system is focused on resistive sparring, not kata study or bunkai. In Kyokushin's case, kata and bunkai took a far second to drilling techniques that could be used in knockdown sparring and then proving them in knockdown sparring. Again, Kyokushin is the exception to other karate orgs.

Quote:I'm not concerned so much with the training methods as the specific fighting techniques.

From my perspective (and what myself and John have been saying all along), is that you don't have techniques unless you can actually use them. You are just as likely not to be able to use the techniques as you are to be able to use them, because they remain hypothetical and theoritical until they are tested. Go back to the Kyokushin example. What made Kyokushin able to beat the Thai fighters the second time? The techniques stayed pretty much the same, didn't they? What changed were the training methods.

Quote: What would you say about Victor Smith's view of Karate as being highly functional?

I disagree with him. Mostly because of this statement that he made:

Quote:Karate was not designed for short term study and execution, simply because there was no need to develop it that way.

When I'm talking about funtional I don't mean functional in a longer amount of time than absolutely needed. To me that is inefficent, and therefore is not as functional a system as possible. The reason why the system takes so long to learn is because of the cultural trappings that are involved in the training methods. I don't think that issue can be skirted so easily. If a system takes longer to learn than it needs to, then it is not ideally functional, because it is not ideally efficient. Because the statement quoted above was a key link in the chain of the logic of Victor's post, I disagree with the rest.

--Chris

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

I see what you're saying. I don't completely agree but I kind of do. I wasnt aware of the Kyokushin figthers winning only the second time or even that they fought on two occasions. Where can I find the details of that online? What about you saying that the techniques were the same the second tiem but the training methods were different? Thats what I mean is that the techniques arent the problem only the training methods. And thats part of traditional martial arts I have an issue with. I really feel that to a large extent traditional techniques can be trained somewhat live and trainign that isnt fully alive can still be useful, at least in the early stages training. My ideal martial art would probably be Kajukenbo, as practised without the forms (which they dotn pull fighting techniques from much anyway). Many groups do this, including using the self defense techniques in training but then adding elements of mma. Krav Maga that includes sparring is very good as well imo.

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Harry Cook, a leading Karate historian, had this to say on another forum regarding the influence of Muay Thai on Kyokushin:

Quote: [...] I suspect that a major influence on the development of Kyokushinkai knockdown was the matches that Oyama's students had with Thai boxers, Tadashi Nakamura in his The Human face of Karate, Shufunotomo Co. Ltd, Japan 1989 refers to the matches he and others held in Bangkok. I interviewed Nakamura sensei over ten years ago for the now defunct Fighting Arts International magazine and I certainly got the impression that the idea of knockdown was derived to a large degree from Muay Thai.

Anyhow, I suppose I still dont fully grasp your view of using boxing as a delivery system. I suppose for you it's more integrated than my image of it. What I'm talking about is using the basic jab, cross, hook, uppercut, evasions, from boxing, and thats it

Storm, the things you mentioned are FUNDAMENTALS. This may come as a shock to you, but fundamentals are 1) All you really have use of in fighting. 2) All you really NEED for use in fighting 3) The foundation without which, you have nothing. You'd have a sand castle.

For people to fight well, they need nothing more than fundamentals. The further one drifts from that fundamental core, the more their entire structure breaks down. Especially under pressure, and that's the key point.

So when I speak of boxing a "delivery system", it starts with fundamentals. All I practically do anymore is develop more fundamentals: balance, footwork, timing, tight structure, defensive ability before offensive ability, economy of motion, punching out and straight back, keeping elbows to center, etc. Nothing is more important than those things. REAL pressure is a mother. If people haven't sparred to knock-out intensity before, they will have no true appreciation for fundamentals. And I'm not talking about playing "slappy hands" either.

If I'm sparring with someone who doesn't have those fundamentals in place the level that I do, I will break his defense down and "score" (and I'm not talking about points). The best fighters have just mastered the basics. Have you ever heard that before? (food for thought here; is there really such a thing as an "advanced" technique?)

Now, once you have those fundamentals in place (again, without which you're building a house on quicksand), you can begin to branch out slightly (slightly). You can adjust things here and there (tricky footwork, feinting/faking, attack by drawing, etc) and you can add techniques that move you away from the core. You can work false leads, brush passes, etc. and move to outflank. You can work sweeps (I practice a lot of sweeps from silat into my game where I can). However, doing those things is only possible to the degree to which my fundamentals are superior to my opponents. If we are equal in that department or my opponent is superior, I'm not straying from that small cluster of fundamental movements that you described. To do otherwise is flat-out suicide.

Quote:

You mean boxing as it is when integrated with other skills.

Delivery system is not limited to "just" boxing. It simply means that you have those fundamentals down as your foundation. You aren't limited to them however. So you are correct in a sense. It's just that whatever you "add" should resemble that general delivery system (such as Thai boxing, savate, etc. Both of those arts have the same delivery system as their foundation.)

On to the next video. This is Shotokan Karate, not Okinawan. More than that, this is the Japenese mililtary practicing Shotokan. Bloodier, yes. I doubt there is much kata training going on with these guys. This video does not speak to the training methodologies of tradional karate in the slightest.

I have the entire DVD serie where this footage was taken from. Originally it is a French DVD series (2 dvd) of Karate Bushido called 'Tresor du Japon - Okinawa Karate'. Shotokan is presented as a shorin ryu school. The demonstrator is Yoshitaka Mueno (8th dan Kyoshi in Shotokan-ryu), of the Federation of self defense karate of the Japanese police force. They demonstrate also kata and application on the video (JION).So I guess they use kata in their instruction. When I trained at Wakayama university, it was pretty much this format of kumite. Accidents happen but usually everybody ended training without bleeding. But when pushed and at end of the training when evrybody is tired and control was not that good enymore, sometimes accidents happen. My last training day I got a punch on the chin wich I felt till I got home 2 days later.

Here is a video of one of my students in competition.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKZB7Q4E3CgToo fast fo me nowadays but they do not commit there techniques with body weight, only speed. In adult training (non competition) pace is slower but techniques are more determined towards destroying, but with control so that technique does not penetrate. This is done by stopping before target. We fight without protective gear. Sometimes fist protector not to rip the skin at contact.